Response to your comments on Accessible Rich Internet Applications (WAI-ARIA) 1.0

Dear Tina Holmboe:

Thank you for your comments on the 24 February 2009 Last Call Working
Draft of Accessible Rich Internet Applications (WAI-ARIA) 1.0
( The Protocols and
Formats Working Group has reviewed all comments received on the draft. We
would like to know whether we have understood your comments correctly and
whether you are satisfied with our resolutions.

Please review our resolutions for the following comments, and reply to us
by 1 February 2010 to say whether you accept them or to discuss additional
concerns you have with our response. You can respond in the following

* If you have a W3C account, we request that you respond online at;

* Else, by email to (be sure to reference our
comment ID so we can track your response). Note that this list is publicly

Please see below for the text of comments that you submitted and our
resolutions to your comments. Each comment includes a link to the archived
copy of your original comment on, and may also
include links to the relevant changes in the Accessible Rich Internet
Applications (WAI-ARIA) 1.0 editors' draft at

Due to the scope of changes made in response to comments on the Last Call
Working Draft of WAI-ARIA, we are returning the specification to Working
Draft status. We will shortly publish a public "stabilization draft" of
WAI-ARIA and updated Working Drafts of the accompanying documents. While
these versions will not incorporate further discussion based on your
acknowledgement of our response to your comments, we will work with you on
your feedback as part of our preparation for the following version. You are
also welcome to submit new comments on the new public versions in addition
to sending your acknowledgement of our response to your previous comments.

Note that if you still strongly disagree with our resolution on an issue,
you have the opportunity to file a formal objection (according to 3.3.2 of
the W3C Process, at
to Formal objections will be reviewed during
the candidate recommendation transition meeting with the W3C Director,
unless we can come to agreement with you on a resolution in advance of the

Thank you for your time reviewing and sending comments. Though we cannot
always do exactly what each commenter requests, all of the comments are
valuable to the development of Accessible Rich Internet Applications
(WAI-ARIA) 1.0.


Janina Sajka, PFWG Chair

Michael Cooper, PFWG Staff Contact

Comment 54: Use XHTML Role Attribute Module
Date: 2009-04-12
Archived at:
Relates to: Accessible Rich Internet Applications (WAI-ARIA) 1.0 - 2.1. WAI-ARIA Roles <>
Status: Proposal not accepted

Your comment:
   This is a formal response from the XHTML WG to the Protocols and Formats
Working Group

   on the WAI-ARIA draft of the 24th of February 2009.

   The XHTML working group has no comments to the majority of the ARIA

   draft. An exception is the first paragraph of section 2.1, which

   currently read:

     "An ARIA role is set on an element using a role attribute,

      similar to the role attribute defined in the XHTML Role

      Attribute Module [XHTML-ROLES]."

   It is our view that instead of the phrase "similar to", the ARIA

   should instead normatively reference the XHTML Role Attribute Module

   This module provides the required functionality, and the underlying 

   vocabulary ( includes the WAI-ARIA 

   role values.

   This would, in our opinion, increase the possibility of

   interoperability, and reduce the number of places role values need be


Response from the Working Group:
We agree with your points about the value of the XHTML Role Attribute
Module. Since the time this comment was made, however, it was announced
that XHTML 2 would no longer be developed and the XHTML Role Attribute
Module would not become a Recommendation. This makes it impossible for ARIA
to reference it.

The HTML 5 Working Group is expected to inherit the Role Attribute,
largely for the purpose of supporting ARIA. We will lobby to have the full
functionality of the Role Attribute included, including extensibility and
reference to the XHTML Vocabulary. This may be controversial, and we will
appreciate the help of former XHTML 2 WG members to support this effort via
comments on the HTML 5 specification.

Received on Tuesday, 15 December 2009 00:34:06 UTC